If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

I took all the players in the majors from 1993-2008 with 100 RBI (567 players) and broke them into groups by K/BB. I think it speaks for itself. One note though, of the 24 players at 3.00 or worse, 4 played in Coors Field.

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

I know that it's in vogue right now to say that RBIs are insignificant stats because they're dependent upon everybody else in the lineup. But in a way, that's exactly the point. A lineup needs to work together to maximize its efficiency. And the guys responsible for driving in runs will do so if they put the ball in play with regularity and authority. To me, the most underrated stat in the game is total bases. I'll take a total-base guy in the cleanup spot every day. Every total base equates to one or more that he moves along a runner. Walks are wonderful, but an offense can't prosper on them alone. I know you're not saying that. You acknowledged that Dunn, for instance, is not a great driver in of runs because he doesn't put the ball in play often enough. Where we disagree is that I'm not a fan of RBI guys deferring their duty. And it doesn't mean that I'm basing my offense around one hitter. I just want batters to function productively in their roles. The 4-man is a better RBI guy than the 5-man, and the 5-man is better than the 6-man (if the manager is making out the lineup properly).

The walks you showed for the RBI guys are, in some part, a function of those players being pitched around. That doesn't always translate to an intentional walk. But it's an acceptable walk on the pitcher's part (and consequently, not the outcome that the offense would prefer). Now, if Francisco swings fruitlessly at pitches that a pitcher is deliberately keeping away from him, trying to make him chase, he won't succeed. I agree that he needs to refine his approach in that respect. But in the short time he was up in Cincinnati--which is the only time I've seen him hit--he seemed to be doing a nice job of that. It was anecdotal, of course, and inconsequential statistically, but encouraging to the eye.

Two things with him are givens. One, he will hit for power. And two, he won't walk much. The question, for me, is whether he will hit for average. I understand the line of reasoning and math that suggests he won't. I choose, perhaps optimistically, to trust in the progress that I've seen, his special skills, and his apparent penchant (small sample) for playing up to his competition. It can go either way. A few of us, adopting sort of a macro view, like his chances. Most, citing more specific predictors, don't. So be it.

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

Originally Posted by mace

I know that it's in vogue right now to say that RBIs are insignificant stats because they're dependent upon everybody else in the lineup. But in a way, that's exactly the point. A lineup needs to work together to maximize its efficiency. And the guys responsible for driving in runs will do so if they put the ball in play with regularity and authority. To me, the most underrated stat in the game is total bases. I'll take a total-base guy in the cleanup spot every day. Every total base equates to one or more that he moves along a runner. Walks are wonderful, but an offense can't prosper on them alone. I know you're not saying that. You acknowledged that Dunn, for instance, is not a great driver in of runs because he doesn't put the ball in play often enough. Where we disagree is that I'm not a fan of RBI guys deferring their duty. And it doesn't mean that I'm basing my offense around one hitter. I just want batters to function productively in their roles. The 4-man is a better RBI guy than the 5-man, and the 5-man is better than the 6-man (if the manager is making out the lineup properly).

I get your point, but we are talking too much of an extreme with Francisco, just like we are when we get into Dunn. They are both on the far extremes of examples. I am all about total bases, because it shows good slugging. No offense is going to prosper on walks alone, but its not going to prospect on hits alone either. I don't believe in 'RBI guys'. I believe in 'run producers'. Run producers avoid outs and acquire bases. I don't care how they do it, I just care that they do it. If you have enough guys who do it right, your team is going to do very well on offense. Now of course I want the sluggers hitting behind the non sluggers (or in front of them in the case of the guys who don't get on base or slug) because its going to produce more runs that way. Francisco has shown a fairly unique skillset in the minor leagues so far. He reminds me of Joel Guzman in a lot of ways, and thats not really a good thing. Guzman of course is a former Top 5 prospect in all of baseball, but his poor plate discipline caught up with him in AAA where he has stagnated for several years now. The problem is, his skillset as it is today, simply does not work in the major leagues. It does not produce at an above average level.

The walks you showed for the RBI guys are, in some part, a function of those players being pitched around. That doesn't always translate to an intentional walk. But it's an acceptable walk on the pitcher's part (and consequently, not the outcome that the offense would prefer). Now, if Francisco swings fruitlessly at pitches that a pitcher is deliberately keeping away from him, trying to make him chase, he won't succeed. I agree that he needs to refine his approach in that respect. But in the short time he was up in Cincinnati--which is the only time I've seen him hit--he seemed to be doing a nice job of that. It was anecdotal, of course, and inconsequential statistically, but encouraging to the eye.

I too was somewhat impressed in his short time at the plate as far as patience goes, but it was still all of 25 trips to the plate. His other 2000 suggest we need a whole lot more evidence to believe he has changed his ways.

Two things with him are givens. One, he will hit for power. And two, he won't walk much. The question, for me, is whether he will hit for average. I understand the line of reasoning and math that suggests he won't. I choose, perhaps optimistically, to trust in the progress that I've seen, his special skills, and his apparent penchant (small sample) for playing up to his competition. It can go either way. A few of us, adopting sort of a macro view, like his chances. Most, citing more specific predictors, don't. So be it.

We can't say for sure that he will hit for power, at least not a ton of it. If he continues to swing at stuff out of the zone in the major leagues, there is nothing to suggest he can hit for power like he did in the minor leagues where none of the pitchers were as good, fastballs didn't move as much, breaking balls didn't break as much and pitchers couldn't hit their spots as easy. He could just as easily turn into Joel Guzman as he turns into Bill Hall or Wily Mo Pena.

As for the hope that he hits for an average.... unless he hits .300, and he won't unless he cuts down his strikeout rate or starts hitting 45 HR's, its not going to be enough to work if his BABIP is anything but an historical outlier.

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I took all the players in the majors from 1993-2008 with 100 RBI (567 players) and broke them into groups by K/BB. I think it speaks for itself. One note though, of the 24 players at 3.00 or worse, 4 played in Coors Field.

Are these minor league K/BB rates achieved at ages 19-22? Or are they major league K/BB rates achieved after players reached maturity?

We are dealing here with the prospects for a guy who just turned 22, yet you are comparing his numbers to fully formed major league performances.

Show me any minor leaguer in the Reds system and I will find flaws. The issue is projecting forward, not assuming static performance.

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

Issue is, Francisco's BABIP on the season was unsustainable due to crazy rates at AAA and MLB.

You are willing to throw out a season's worth of stats because a player was on a sustained hot streak at the end of the year.

Cisco was tearing it up at the end of his time in Carolina and continued through Louisville and into Cincy. Can he maintain that level? No, and his full season stats aren't anywhere near what he did the last two months of the season. But those two months are a part of his season. Just like any player's hot streaks.

You really seem biased against Francisco and show a tendancy to interpret data against him.

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

Originally Posted by GOYA

You are willing to throw out a season's worth of stats because a player was on a sustained hot streak at the end of the year.

Cisco was tearing it up at the end of his time in Carolina and continued through Louisville and into Cincy. Can he maintain that level? No, and his full season stats aren't anywhere near what he did the last two months of the season. But those two months are a part of his season. Just like any player's hot streaks.

You really seem biased against Francisco and show a tendancy to interpret data against him.

In doug's defense, we all have our favorites, and ones that we don't particularly care for.

But yeah, he does have a strong bias towards 1st round picks. I'm not even going to bring up he who i cannot mention.

Here are the simple FACTS. In his career, JF hasn't walked much. In the minors, he's offset that somewhat with his power, and decent BA. Doug like to point out his MLB BABIP, saying it is unsustainable. he's right, it isn't. However his 2009 minor league BABIP is only .332, which includes a .312 BABIP at Carolina. And he posted a .818 OPS there, most of which he did as a 21 year old. His OPS rises at each level. His power never seems to be affected. He's reducing his K's, and he had a hot Aug-Sept. But maybe that only applies to SOME players.

For example, say you have a player that has never hit for power anywhere except one stop in low A. Since then, almost no power, but then has a month in the bigs where he hits 7-8 HR's in just under 200 AB's. For some, that would indicate it is just a hot streak, and for others it says he has 15-20 HR potential. The latter is using traditional scouting techniques: body type, scouting scales etc. And that type of evaluation is very important. Until you ignore them to say a player cannot succeed despite the tools, when all his stats trend in the direction you want a young player to go.

All JF has done in his professional career is learn and get better, at the plate if not the field. 25 HR's at Dayton in 2007. 23 at Sarasota in 2008, in the FSL no less. 30 HR's across 3 levels in 2009. That's more HR's than Bruce had in 2008, although Bruce did his at AAA and MLB.

JF is the best power prospect in the system. Better than Frazier, better than Alonso. He hits for a high BA, but yes, i'd like to see him BB more. In 2007, Jay Bruce walked 47 times. In 2008 he walked 45 times. In 2009, limited due to injury, he BB'd 38 times, but that's inline with his career norms. That is twice as many BB's as Francisco, but isn't it funny that Bruce's 2007 and 2008 minor league BABIP's are never mentioned as unsustainable? 2007, .390. 2008, .442.

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

Originally Posted by GOYA

You are willing to throw out a season's worth of stats because a player was on a sustained hot streak at the end of the year.

Cisco was tearing it up at the end of his time in Carolina and continued through Louisville and into Cincy. Can he maintain that level? No, and his full season stats aren't anywhere near what he did the last two months of the season. But those two months are a part of his season. Just like any player's hot streaks.

You really seem biased against Francisco and show a tendancy to interpret data against him.

Doug??? Cherry-pick stats to make an argument??? I'm shocked! Shocked, I say!

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

In doug's defense, we all have our favorites, and ones that we don't particularly care for.

But yeah, he does have a strong bias towards 1st round picks. I'm not even going to bring up he who i cannot mention.

Here are the simple FACTS. In his career, JF hasn't walked much. In the minors, he's offset that somewhat with his power, and decent BA. Doug like to point out his MLB BABIP, saying it is unsustainable. he's right, it isn't. However his 2009 minor league BABIP is only .332, which includes a .312 BABIP at Carolina. And he posted a .818 OPS there, most of which he did as a 21 year old. His OPS rises at each level. His power never seems to be affected. He's reducing his K's, and he had a hot Aug-Sept. But maybe that only applies to SOME players.

For example, say you have a player that has never hit for power anywhere except one stop in low A. Since then, almost no power, but then has a month in the bigs where he hits 7-8 HR's in just under 200 AB's. For some, that would indicate it is just a hot streak, and for others it says he has 15-20 HR potential. The latter is using traditional scouting techniques: body type, scouting scales etc. And that type of evaluation is very important. Until you ignore them to say a player cannot succeed despite the tools, when all his stats trend in the direction you want a young player to go.

All JF has done in his professional career is learn and get better, at the plate if not the field. 25 HR's at Dayton in 2007. 23 at Sarasota in 2008, in the FSL no less. 30 HR's across 3 levels in 2009. That's more HR's than Bruce had in 2008, although Bruce did his at AAA and MLB.

JF is the best power prospect in the system. Better than Frazier, better than Alonso. He hits for a high BA, but yes, i'd like to see him BB more. In 2007, Jay Bruce walked 47 times. In 2008 he walked 45 times. In 2009, limited due to injury, he BB'd 38 times, but that's inline with his career norms. That is twice as many BB's as Francisco, but isn't it funny that Bruce's 2007 and 2008 minor league BABIP's are never mentioned as unsustainable? 2007, .390. 2008, .442.

Why is that?

Why would they be? He had a .308 Minor league BA, .551 Minor league Slg%, and Walked at nearly a 10% clip.

JF .281 BA, .482 Slg and Walked at a 4% clip. And Jay was even younger than Juan.

Sure Jays #'s were unsustainable, just as Juans are currently. The difference? No one suggesting Jays numbers were sustainable like right now with Juan.

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

Why would they be? He had a .308 Minor league BA, .551 Minor league Slg%, and Walked at nearly a 10% clip.

JF .281 BA, .482 Slg and Walked at a 4% clip. And Jay was even younger than Juan.

Sure Jays #'s were unsustainable, just as Juans are currently. The difference? No one suggesting Jays numbers were sustainable like right now with Juan.

Normalize Bruce's BABIP, and you have a .300ish OBP. But he can overcome it because he is Jay Bruce. I am not saying JF's lack of BB's isn't a problem. I'm saying Bruce's ridiculous BABIP's overshadowed the fact that his BB rate wasn't all that good. He has to hit .300+ for his OBP to be non detrimental.

There isn't a single poster that doesn't want JF to BB more. Some think he can and will be a consistent .830+ OPS bat. How he does that is open to interpretation or guess work.

I think he'll settle in as a 40 BB guy his first year as a MLB player. Notice how I firmly believe he will be one? I think he's the future LF for the Reds personally, possibly by mid 2010, certainly by OD 2011 barring a trade.

I also think he'll mature and have a few seasons of 60BB's. I think he CAN do this. But as long as he can get his BA around .290, he won't hurt the team in the OBP department considering his power. And .290 isn't really a stretch.

Re: Who is Redszone's #3 prospect?

Originally Posted by TRF

Normalize Bruce's BABIP, and you have a .300ish OBP. But he can overcome it because he is Jay Bruce. I am not saying JF's lack of BB's isn't a problem. I'm saying Bruce's ridiculous BABIP's overshadowed the fact that his BB rate wasn't all that good. He has to hit .300+ for his OBP to be non detrimental.

There isn't a single poster that doesn't want JF to BB more. Some think he can and will be a consistent .830+ OPS bat. How he does that is open to interpretation or guess work.

I think he'll settle in as a 40 BB guy his first year as a MLB player. Notice how I firmly believe he will be one? I think he's the future LF for the Reds personally, possibly by mid 2010, certainly by OD 2011 barring a trade.

I also think he'll mature and have a few seasons of 60BB's. I think he CAN do this. But as long as he can get his BA around .290, he won't hurt the team in the OBP department considering his power. And .290 isn't really a stretch.

Say what? Jay Bruce's BB rate has never been an issue. He's been right around 10% in the minors and the majors and for his age that's excellent. So you lost me there. Your right about the fact that there isn't a single poster that doesn't want him to BB more. The problem here is some already believe he will and have him penciled in as a near gaurantee. Others of us feel the mountain he has to climb is awful high and he has a long ways to go to get there, and his chances of doing that are a bit slim to say the least. But now what the facts say is we should be quite pessimistic about his chances, yet all this optimism over a couple of short stints in AAA and MLB.

"You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball